Although radiometric dating methods are not perfect, many independent radiometric methods (besides non-radiometric ones) give
largely consistent dating results, and indicate the age of the earth to be about 4.6 billion years, which is orders of magnitude
greater than any YEC "model" allows (Dalrymple, 1994). Moreover, these methods provide largely consistent results for the ages
of various rock strata throughout the geologic column, which correlate well with non-radiometric dating methods, including
including cores, varves, dendrochronology, and others (Brinkman, 1995; Deem, 2017; Duff, 2014; Webb, 2014; Young, 1988, 2008).

In contrast, most YECs claim the Earth, and indeed the entire universe, is only 6,000 to 10,000 year old universe and earth.
They cite a number of processes that supposedly support this, but these have been well refuted (Strahler, 1987; Stassen, 2005; Stoner, 1992).
Many YEC authors also frequently point to alleged flaws in radiometric dating methods, but have had difficulty explaining the overall
sloping patterns they produce from stratigraphically lower to higher samples, and the largely consistent correlations among many
radiometric and non-radiometric dating methods.
.

With the aim of more fully investigating the validity of radioisotope
dating methods, in 1997 the Institute of Creation Research (ICR) and the Creation Research Society (CRS) launched an eight-year research
program. Named RATE for "Radioisotopes and the Age of The Earth," the preliminary investigations carried out in the first
three years were summarized in a publication by Larry Vardiman et al(2000), with a subsequent report entitled Thousands Not
Billions by Donald DeYoung (2005). Although the authors declared the RATE project a success, when fully understood, it is seen to
be an abject failure, and further confirmation of an ancient Earth.

First, the RATE authors employed a number of scientifically questionable methods (Neyman, 2003, 2004). Second, the authors
raised a number of alleged problems for mainstream dating, such as Po halos and helium defusion rates, which have been well
refuted (Kuban, 2013; Loechelt, 2008a, 2008b; Zweerink, 2012).
Third, and most important, the RATE authors acknowledge that the amount of radioactive decay recorded in the geologic record is
far greater than a YEC time frame can accommodate. One might think that they would then accept the logical conclusion that the Earth is old, or at least
question their YEC views. Instead, they astoundingly claim that the results actually support their view. In order to do that,
they proposed that nuclear decay rates were vastly accelerated during or soon after the "creation week" by some divine providential
process (translation: miracle), even though there is no independent evidence for that. Even more problematic, if such acceleration had
occurred, it would not generate more than enough heat to vaporize the entire earth. But that too did not deter the authors from
their mission of supporting YECism. They then proposed more unspecified, ad-hoc, extra-Biblical miracles protect the Earth and
all living things from the immense heat. They never explained why God would do either, since the only effect of accelerating
decay rates would be to make the Earth old and generate lethal heat. Moreover, even the proposed acceleration would not solve
the problem, since the sloping patterns of radio decay seen in the geologic record would not be produced, or anything close to
them. Of course, one could imagine more miracles to change the patterns, even though there again would be no logical reason
for it, other than to make the Earth look old. Such tactics, using ad-hoc miracles to evade clear and powerful evidence against
YECism, and then claiming the evidence supports that view, shows how profoundly unscientific "scientific" creationism really is.
For a more thorough evaluation of the RATE project see Isaac (2007).